Thames Gateway

Sarah Teather: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list local planning authorities in the Thames Gateway which have in place an urban capacity study which meets his Department's standards.

Yvette Cooper: The Secretary of State, my right. hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister does not keep records of local planning authorities which have undertaken urban capacity studies.
	"Planning Policy Guidance Note No 3: Housing", requires regional planning bodies to coordinate the programme of capacity studies undertaken by local authorities in their area and maintain consistency of approach in terms of the methodology used.

Housing (Northamptonshire)

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what uses his Department proposes to make of the 2021 to 2031 housing projections for North Northamptonshire contained in the Milton Keynes and South Midlands sub-regional spatial strategy.

Yvette Cooper: The Milton Keynes and South Midlands sub-regional strategy contains a provisional planning assumption about levels of housing growth in the towns of Corby, Kettering and Wellingborough for the period 2021 to 2031. These figures will be reassessed through future reviews of the regional spatial strategy.

Respect Agenda

Eric Pickles: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how he is contributing to the Respect agenda.

Phil Woolas: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is making a very significant contribution to the Respect agenda through the £39 billion Sustainable Communities Plan. The ODPM is in particular making key contributions on the specific themes of housing, family support and working to make neighbourhoods cleaner, safer and greener.
	For example:
	ODPM, along with the Respect Task Force and Department for Education and Skills (DfES), are key players in a cross departmental initiative aimed at establishing family support projects in up to 50 areas during 2006–07. This will help prevent and reduce homelessness. The projects will be delivered through the Local Area Agreement (LAA) framework.
	ODPM is co-funding the Safer and Stronger Communities Fund which will contribute to reduced crime, reducing the harm caused by illegal drugs, addressing antisocial behaviour, empowering communities and improving the condition of streets and public spaces in disadvantaged areas. And the successful Neighbourhood Managers and Wardens programmes will be rolled out more widely.
	We have allocated £1.5 billion over 2005–08 to the 86 most deprived local authority areas in England. Local Strategic Partnerships use these funds alongside their main programmes—usually concentrating on crime and antisocial behaviour, educational underachievement, worklessness, housing/environment and health issues—to improve public services and aid long term regeneration.
	Our proposed Neighbourhood Charters will provide formal, agreed, identification of the rights, duties and responsibilities between citizens, public services and others at a local, neighbourhood, level.
	The Supporting People programme will contribute to the Respect agenda by providing housing related support to vulnerable people and helping them improve their quality of life through the provision of a stable environment.
	We are also developing a "Respect Standard" for housing management which will set out the core elements of a good service. We are also working to strengthen the links between enforcement tools and support packages to address the underlying causes of antisocial behaviour while simultaneously acting on the needs of the community.

Thames Gateway

Sarah Teather: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will publish a regular report of progress towards the aspirations and commitments set out in his strategy "Creating sustainable communities: Delivering the Thames Gateway".

Yvette Cooper: "Creating sustainable communities: Delivering the Thames Gateway", published in March 2005, set out progress to date and outlined the Government's plans for the future development of the Thames Gateway.
	Later this year, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will publish a Strategic Framework for the Gateway, which will cover latest progress and form the basis of a delivery plan for the future.

Iraq

Jeremy Corbyn: To ask the Prime Minister When he expects British troops to leave Iraq.

Tony Blair: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence to the hon. Member for Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk (Mr. Moore) on 28 February 2006, Official Report, column 619W.

Carcase Disposal

Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the effects of the ban on burning carcases; and if she will make a statement.

Ben Bradshaw: holding answer 3 March 2006
	The EU Animal By Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 prohibits the 'open burning' of animal carcases. It is there to protect public and animal health from any potential risks associated with the burning of fallen stock.
	A number of disposal routes for fallen stock are permitted by the regulation including rendering, incineration or sending the carcasses to a knackers yard or hunt kennel. The National Fallen Stock Scheme, aimed at reducing the cost to farmers of disposing of their fallen stock, was launched in November 2004

Coast Protection Act

David Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on the operation of the Coast Protection Act 1949.

Elliot Morley: Defra has policy responsibility for flood and coastal erosion risk management in England and provides most of the Government funding for managing that risk. Flood and coastal defence operating authorities (the Environment Agency, local authorities and internal drainage boards) are Defra's delivery partners. Operating authorities have "permissive powers" which means that while they may undertake flood and coastal erosion risk measures, they are not generally obliged to do so.
	Coast Protection authorities (district or unitary councils) have permissive powers to carry out works to manage the risk of coastal erosion or encroachment by the sea under the Coast Protection Act 1949. Subject to conditions determined by the Treasury, Defra may make grants towards any expenditure. To satisfy conditions, proposals must satisfy essential technical, economic and environmental criteria and achieve a relevant priority.
	The Act also includes provisions for the safety of navigation. Sections 34 and 35 refer to consents to undertake a broad range of marine works in the sea around the coasts of England and Wales. Defra is responsible for administering these provisions on behalf of the Secretary of State. Defra expects to make proposals for improving the regime for regulating works at sea, of which these controls are a component, in a Marine Bill to be introduced later in this Parliament.

Common Agricultural Policy

Theresa Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what baseline figures she is using for assessing progress on her Department's targets to (a) deliver step-change improvements to the way common agricultural policy schemes are administered, (b) rationalise delivery programmes, (c) implement the Modernising Rural Delivery plan, (d) implement the England Rural Development ICT programme, (e) implement the EA Efficiency programme, (f) generate efficiencies in flood defence provision in the Environment Agency, (g) place a greater emphasis on the provision of online services in the Environment Agency, (h) make back-office improvements at the Environment Agency, (i) streamline policy-making, (j) rationalise back-office functions in her Department, (k) improve procurement and (l) work with local authorities to deliver efficiency gains on waste services; what progress has been made towards these targets to date; and what the total efficiency savings achieved to date are for these targets.

Jim Knight: The response is set out in the following table. Baseline figures are provided at programme level where available, although these are mostly held in detail at project level with efficiencies reported through local governance processes. Stated efficiency savings are as reported to OGC in January 2006, at which time quarter 3 information from Executive agencies and non departmental public bodies had yet to be approved by their management boards.
	
		
			 Programme Quarter Efficiency savings delivery by end Baseline Target efficiency saving SR04 Efficiency savings reported 
		
		
			 Total for DEFRA Efficiency Programme  
			 £ million 2 2005–06 3,416 610 141 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) 3 2005–06 13,650 2,400 1,016 
			   
			 (a) Deliver step-change improvements to the way common agricultural policy schemes are administered 
			 £ million 2 2005–06 157,230 32 0 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) 3 2005–06 3,953 1,400 876 
			   
			 (b) Rationalise delivery programmes (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— (2)— 
			   
			 (c) Implement the Modernising Rural Delivery Plan  
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (3)— 13 0 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) n/a n/a (3)— 0 0 
			   
			 (d) Implement the England Rural Development ICT Programme  
			 £ million 4 2004–05 (4)— 21 7.6 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) 3 2004–05 (5)— 150 0 
			   
			 (e) Implement the Environment Agency's Efficiency Programme  
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (6)— 106.2 47.2 
			   
			 (f) Generate efficiencies in flood defence provision in the Environment Agency   
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (7)— 53 21 
			   
			 (g) Place a greater emphasis on the provision of online services in the Environment Agency 
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (7)— 10.5 2.2 
			   
			 (h) Make back-office improvements at the Environment Agency  
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (7)— 19.4 12.4 
			   
			 (i) Streamline policy-making  
			 £ million 3 2005–06 121.9 10 0 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) 3 2005–06 2,761 327 3 
			   
			 (j) Rationalise back-office functions in her Department  
			 £ million — — 23 6.6 34 
			 Headcount (FTE(1)) — — 680 254 126 
			   
			 (k) Improve procurement  
			 £ million 2 2005–06 (7)— 41 (8)8.9 
			   
			 (l) Work with local authorities to deliver efficient gains on waste services  
			 £ million — 2004–05 (9)— 299 54.3 
		
	
	(1) Full-time equivalent.
	(2) No other delivery programmes within DEFRA efficiency portfolio.
	(3) 2004–05 resource figures set out in DEFRA's Annual Report 2005 for Natural Resources and Rural Affairs (NRRA) Directorate General, and the Rural Development Service (RDS); and in the 2004–05 corporate plans of the Countryside Agency and English Nature.
	(4) Productivity savings measured annually against a calculation of time taken to process number of applications received using previous methods.
	(5) Staff complement in 2005–06 RAE.
	(6) 2004–05 expenditure.
	(7) Determined in detail at project level.
	(8) Plus 6.5 non-sustainable in 2004–05.
	(9) Defined by local authorities previous year spend. Data reported on Annual Efficiency Statements.

Rats

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 30 June 2005, Official Report, column 1644W, on rats, if she will place a copy in the Library of the relevant section of the English house condition survey.

Jim Knight: Copies of both the 1996 and 2001 English House Condition Surveys are already available on the ODPM website at: http://www.odpm.gov.uk/index.asp?id=1155278

Supermarkets (Packaging)

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has to introduce legislation (a) limiting the amount of packaging that can be used for products sold in supermarkets and (b) to require supermarkets to use easily recyclable packaging.

Ben Bradshaw: We have no plans to introduce further legislation on packaging.
	There are two sets of Regulations which cover packaging in the UK and which encourage businesses (including supermarkets) to minimise packaging and to manufacture packaging which can be recycled.
	The Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 2003 (as amended) include a requirement that packaging should be manufactured so that the volume and weight are limited to the minimum adequate to maintain the necessary level of safety, hygiene and acceptance for the packed product and for the consumer. These Regulations also require that
	"packaging . . . be designed, produced and commercialised . . . to permit its . . . recovery, including recycling, and to minimise its impact on the environment . . .".
	The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2005 are intended to increase the recovery and recycling of packaging waste. Because the amount of packaging waste recycling businesses have to do is determined, in part, by the amount of packaging they handle, they can cut costs if they reduce the packaging used around their products.
	Legislation is one way of reducing packaging, but consumers have a part to play. For example, if consumers made a point of choosing goods that are not heavily packaged, or bought 'loose' food rather than pre-packaged, or used their own shopping bags or boxes, manufacturers might be encouraged to reduce the quantity of packaging on their products.

Thames Gateway

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 
	(1)  what the estimated level of waste in the Thames Gateway is for (a) 2006, (b) 2010, (c) 2015, (d) 2020 and (e) 2025; what the estimated available capacity is for each year; and if she will make a statement;
	(2)  what estimate the Government have made of the likely additional waste arising from population expansion and building programmes in the Thames Gateway.

Ben Bradshaw: Estimates of the type sought are not normally made or held by Government. National policy set out in Planning Policy Statement 10 "Planning for Sustainable Waste Management" expects regional planning bodies to prepare regional spatial strategies which aim to provide sufficient opportunities to meet the identified needs of their areas for waste management for all waste streams. In turn, planning authorities are expected to prepare local development documents that reflect their contribution to delivering the regional spatial strategy. At the regional level, regional technical advisory bodies support the work of regional planning bodies and have a key role in assembling data and information on waste including from the Environment Agency.
	The ODPM published in December 2005 a sustainability study that assessed across England the environmental, social and economic impacts of additional housing growth scenarios developed in response to the findings of the Barker Review. This study considered the implications for waste management but did not focus down to specific growth areas.

Water Leakage Rates

Paddy Tipping: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the leakage rates were for each water company in the latest period for which figures are available.

Elliot Morley: The Director General of Water Services publishes leakage figures annually in the "Security of supply, leakage and the efficient use of water" reports. Total water company leakage for 2004–05, in megalitres per day, was reported as follows:
	
		
			  Megalitres per day 
		
		
			 Anglian 214 
			 Bournemouth and W. Hants 22 
			 Bristol 53 
			 Cambridge 14 
			 Dee Valley 11 
			 Dwr Cymru 226 
			 Folkestone and Dover 8 
			 Mid Kent 29 
			 Northumbrian North 155 
			 Northumbrian South 67 
			 Portsmouth 30 
			 Severn Trent 502 
			 South East 69 
			 South Staffordshire 74 
			 South West 83 
			 Southern 92 
			 Sutton and East Surrey 24 
			 Tendring Hundred 5 
			 Thames 915 
			 Three Valleys 149 
			 United Utilities 500 
			 Wessex 73 
			 Yorkshire 293

Water Leakage Rates

Paddy Tipping: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what change there has been in each water company's leakage rate in the last five years.

Elliot Morley: The Director General of Water Services publishes leakage figures annually in the "Security of supply, leakage and the efficient use of water" reports. Total water company leakage for 2000–01 and 2004–05 and the difference in these figures, in megalitres per day, was reported as follows:
	
		Megalitres per day
		
			  2000–01 2004–05 Change 
		
		
			 Anglian(11) 194 214 +20 
			 Bournemouth and W. Hants 23 22 -1 
			 Bristol 55 53 -2 
			 Cambridge 13 14 +1 
			 Dee Valley 12 11 -1 
			 Dwr Cymru 260 226 -34 
			 Folkestone and Dover 9 8 -1 
			 Mid Kent 29 29 0 
			 Northumbrian North 164 155 -9 
			 Northumbrian South 72 67 -5 
			 Portsmouth 30 30 0 
			 Severn Trent(12) 340 502 +162 
			 South East 85 69 -16 
			 South Staffordshire 72 74 +2 
			 South West 84 83 -1 
			 Southern 92 92 0 
			 Sutton and East Surrey 24 24 0 
			 Tendring Hundred 6 5 -1 
			 Thames 688 915 +227 
			 Three Valleys 140 149 +9 
			 United Utilities 463 500 +37 
			 Wessex 84 73 -11 
			 Yorkshire 304 293 -11 
		
	
	(11) In 2003–04, Anglian Water calculated leakage using 2001 census population data for the first time. If the 2000–01 leakage figure was calculated using the same population data as used from 2003–04, leakage would follow a stable trend.
	(12) In spring 2003 Severn Trent Water revised its water balance data. The company attributed most of the increase in leakage to methodological changes.

Water Purification

Ashok Kumar: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what research her Department has commissioned into methods of purifying water; and what conclusions she has drawn from the research.

Elliot Morley: The most relevant area of publicly funded research is the Drinking Water Quality and Health Research programme, managed by the Drinking Water Inspectorate. Such research can provide credible and authoritative information and help to ensure that regulations and standards for water quality provide adequate safeguards. Much of this programme touches upon issues related to water purification and summaries of all the reports can be found on the Foundation for Water Research website at www.fwr.org.
	Treatment of the public water supply is an issue for the water companies themselves, although the Research Councils and the European Union's Framework research programmes contribute significant funding to the development of new technologies. Consequently, Defra does not normally fund research into water treatment technologies for drinking water, unless the research is needed to inform new regulations, or where there may be a perceived risk to health.
	One example of research that includes methods of purifying water derived from private sources, is the production of the "Manual on treatment for small water supplies systems". This was produced to help local authorities to discharge their statutory duties and functions relating to private water supplies.

Water System (New Housing)

Gregory Barker: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the new (a) reservoirs, (b) treatment plants and (c) sewerage systems that might be needed to accommodate proposals for new house building up to 2016.

Elliot Morley: holding answer 6 March 2006
	Water companies are already factoring new house building into their water resources plans, using projections from ODPM and local authorities. Ofwat has already assumed in its current price limits that almost 1 million new properties will be connected to the water and sewerage service by 2010.
	To fulfil their duty to maintain adequate supplies of water, several water companies propose to enlarge existing reservoirs (three in total) or construct new ones (five in total). These proposals are set out in the 25 year water resources plans they prepared in 2004. The Environment Agency has advised Ministers about the appropriateness of these proposals and other measures to ensure security of supply in its report "Maintaining water supply", which was published in July 2004.
	Planning for new sewerage systems should be carried out in close and transparent co-operation between planners and water and sewerage companies. The provision of water and sewerage services are key factors in ensuring the sustainability of new housing developments. New sewers are usually laid by developers or requisitioned from the water and sewerage companies.

Life Expectancy

David Simpson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the average life expectancy is for people in (a) England, (b) Scotland, (c) Wales and (d) Northern Ireland.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 8 March 2006
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your question regarding the average life expectancy for people in (a) England; (b) Scotland; (c) Wales and (d) Northern Ireland. I am replying in her absence. (56418)
	The table shows life expectancies at birth for males and females for the four countries requested. These are 'period' expectation of life figures, which are calculated from the mortality rates actually experienced in the years 2002 to 2004. They do not allow for possible changes in mortality in future years.
	
		Period expectation of life at birth by country 2002–04 Years
		
			  Males Females 
		
		
			 England 76.6 80.9 
			 Scotland 73.8 79.1 
			 Wales 76.0 80.4 
			 Northern Ireland 75.8 80.6 
		
	
	Source:
	Interim Life Tables 2002–04, http://www.gad.gov.uk/Life_Tables/Interim_life_tables.htm
	'Cohort' life expectancy figures, which do allow for projected changes in mortality in later years, are available from the Government Actuary's Department's website at: http://www.gad.gov.uk/Life_Tables/Period_and_cohort_eol.htm

Population Numbers (Gloucestershire)

David Drew: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the population of (a) each Gloucestershire district and (b) each ward in the Stroud district was according to (i) figures from the 2001 census, (ii) most recent electoral rolls and (iii) most recent figures for health services users; and what projections he has made for the next five years.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 8 March 2006
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your question regarding the population of (a) each Gloucestershire District and (b) each ward in the Stroud district according to (i) figures from the 2001 Census, (ii) most recent electoral rolls, and (iii) most recent figures for health service users; and what projections have been made for the next five years. I am replying in her absence. (55426)
	The tables attached provide the information you have requested. Data for Gloucestershire Districts are shown in Table 1 and Table 2. Data for wards in Stroud district are shown in Table 3.
	ONS publishes annual mid-year population estimates. The latest estimates are for mid-2004 and are given in Table 1. These mid-year population estimates are the best estimates of the resident population in an area. They are based on Census data taking into account ageing of the population and are adjusted for births, deaths, and net migration. Further information on the methodology can be found at: www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=575.
	Population projections for each district in Gloucestershire, for mid-2005 to mid-2011, are also given in Table 1. These projections are based on the mid-2003 population estimates and are the latest population projections available. They assume that trends in fertility, mortality and migration at the time of the mid-2003 population estimate will continue into the future.
	Electoral rolls provide counts of the number of people registered to vote. Local/European electorate and Parliamentary electorate counts for districts in Gloucestershire can be found in Table 2. The 2004 figures are given for comparison with population estimates and the 2005 figures are the latest available data. It should be noted that the number of people eligible to vote is not the same as the resident population aged 18 and over. There are a number of reasons for this. For example not everyone who is usually resident is entitled to vote (foreign citizens from outside of the EU and Commonwealth, prisoners, etc. are not eligible), some people do not register to vote and people who have more than one address may register in more than one place.
	Further, there is inevitably some double counting of the registered electorate as electoral registration officers vary in how quickly they remove people from the registers after they have moved away from an area or after they have died. These factors have a differential impact from area to area.
	The number of people registered with a GP, living in each district in Gloucestershire, in July 2004, can also be found in Table 2. It should also be noted that patient register counts differ from estimates of the usually resident population for a number of reasons.
	Patient registers include people who are in the country for at least three months, whereas population estimates are based on a usual residence definition requiring a stay of 12 months or more. The patient registers exclude individuals who are ineligible to be registered with a GP. People may be on a patient register after having left the country and not deregistered with their GP; similarly people may have moved to another area and not re-registered. Some patients may have more than one NHS number e.g. they may have been issued a temporary number for a short period. Again, these factors have a differential impact from place to place.
	Ward data are shown in Table 3; the points set out above also apply to wards. However, there are some further points to note for wards.
	The most recent population estimates for wards are for mid-2002. The closest available geography to current electoral wards, for which population estimates are available, is Census Area Statistics (CAS) wards. This geography was created for outputs from the 2001 Census and is based mainly on 2003 electoral wards. The CAS ward level population estimates have been published with the status of "experimental statistics". Therefore, the estimates, and figures derived from them, should be treated with some care. The margin of confidence for population estimates is proportionately larger at ward level than at local authority level.
	The ONS does not produce projections of population at ward level.
	Table 3 contains CAS ward electorate counts for December 2002 and 2004 as well as patient register figures for July 2002 and July 2004. The 2002 figures are given for comparison with population estimates and 2004 are the latest available data.
	Finally, the local government electorate is definitionally closer to the population estimates; however these data are not available at ward level. Hence, the Parliamentary electorate is shown.
	
		Table 1: Mid-2004 Population Estimates and mid-2005 to mid-2011 Population Projections (2003-based) Thousand
		
			  Population Estimate Population Projections(14) 
			  Mid-2004 Mid-2005 Mid-2006 Mid-2007 Mid-2008 Mid-2009 Mid-2010 
		
		
			 Cheltenham 110.9 110.6 110.9 111.2 111.5 111.8 112.2 
			 Cotswold 82.7 82.8 83.3 83.8 84.3 84.8 85.3 
			 Forest of Dean 80.7 81.0 81.4 81.9 82.4 82.9 83.4 
			 Gloucester 110.8 111.4 112.1 112.7 113.4 114.0 114.7 
			 Stroud 109.5 109.9 110.5 111.0 111.6 112.1 112.7 
			 Tewkesbury 78.2 78.9 79.6 80.2 80.8 81.4 82.0 
		
	
	(14) The population projections shown in this table are taken from the 2003-based subnational population projections, the latest set of projections currently available. Therefore they may not be consistent with the 2004 mid-year estimate presented in the first column.
	Source:
	Office for National Statistics
	
		Table 2: Districts in Gloucestershire: Electorate counts and Patient Register counts
		
			  Local Government Electors(15) Parliamentary Electors(16) Local Government Electors(15) Parliamentary Electors(16) Patient Register July 2004 
			  1 December 2004 1 December 2004 1 December 2005 1 December 2005 July 2004 
		
		
			 Cheltenham 85,744 85,064 86,468 85,559 113,549 
			 Cotswold 64,891 64,512 64,348 63,968 84,022 
			 Forest of Dean 63,804 63,637 62,966 62,815 82,753 
			 Gloucester 82,528 82,141 84,484 83,953 115,888 
			 Stroud 86,692 86,136 85,432 84,909 113,893 
			 Tewkesbury 61,776 61,544 62,312 62,055 79,972 
		
	
	(15) Local government electors are those people who are entitled to vote in local elections and who meet the residence qualification. These include Peers and European citizens but exclude overseas voters.
	(16) Parliamentary electors are those people who are entitled to vote in parliamentary elections at Westminster and who meet the residence qualification. Those include overseas voters but exclude Peers and European citizens.
	Source:
	Office for National Statistics
	
		Table 3: CAS Wards in Stroud District: Population Estimates, Electorate counts, and Patient Register counts
		
			 Ward Name Population Estimate Mid-2002 Electorate December 2002 Electorate December 2004 Patient Register July 2002 Patient Register July 2004 
		
		
			 Amberley and Woodchester 2,100 1,755 1,722 2,216 2,191 
			 Berkeley 4,100 3,338 3,320 4,115 4,156 
			 Bisley 2,100 1,756 1,774 2,067 2,099 
			 Cainscross 6,700 5,179 5,185 6,826 7,026 
			 Cam East 4,100 3,310 3,300 4,185 4,204 
			 Cam West 4,200 3,313 3,232 4,275 4,251 
			 Central 1,700 1,409 1,471 1,801 1,912 
			 Chalford 6,300 5,003 4,961 6,622 6,679 
			 Coaley and Uley 2,300 1,870 1,859 2,345 2,350 
			 Dursley 5,900 4,670 4,568 6,073 6,308 
			 Eastington and Standish 1,900 1,515 1,459 1,965 1,934 
			 Farmhill and Paganhill 2,200 1,738 1,738 2,266 2,290 
			 Hardwicke 4,700 3,651 3,742 4,725 4,896 
			 Kingswood 2,000 1,580 1,559 2,189 2,211 
			 Minchinhampton 4,000 3,410 3,429 4,383 4,497 
			 Nailsworth 6,100 4,907 4,936 6,518 6,589 
			 Over Stroud 1,800 1,427 1,451 1,811 1,845 
			 Painswick 4,000 3,420 3,467 4,281 4,398 
			 Rodborough 4,400 3,521 3,500 4,682 4,668 
			 Severn 4,500 3,591 3,672 4,622 4,789 
			 Slade 2,300 1,674 1,600 2,532 2,527 
			 Stonehouse 7,700 5,717 5,801 7,901 8,058 
			 The Stanleys 4,200 3,459 3,354 4,333 4,296 
			 Thrupp 2,300 1,810 1,786 2,402 2,428 
			 Trinity 2,200 1,625 1,551 2,108 2,051 
			 Uplands 2,100 1,759 1,720 2,235 2,244 
			 Upton St. Leonards 2,100 1,803 1,814 2,237 2,241 
			 Vale 1,700 1,443 1,484 1,829 1,893 
			 Valley 2,100 1,695 1,624 2,202 2,287 
			 Wotton-under-Edge 6,400 5,091 5,057 6,474 6,575 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The mid-2002 ward population estimates are consistent with the published mid-2002 local authority estimates (September 2004 revisions), and have been rounded to the nearest hundred.
	2. The electorate counts are taken from the statutory RPF 29 returns.
	Source:
	Office for National Statistics

Research and Development

Adam Holloway: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the level of nominal gross domestic expenditure on research and development was in each year since 1997 and how much of each sum was accounted for by (a) Government spending, (b) private spending and (c) overseas investment.

John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
	Letter from Colin Mowl, dated 8 March 2006
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking what the level of nominal gross domestic expenditure on research and development was in each year since 1997 and how much of each sum was accounted for by (a) Government spending, (b) private spending and (c) overseas investment. I am replying in her absence. (54739)
	The attached table shows how research and development in the UK was funded, including from abroad and by EU programmes. Please note that the specified groups are made up of a number of sources as detailed. The period covered is 1997–2003; the 2004 data will be released 24th March.
	
		Sector funding, Research and Development in the UK, 1997–2003 £ million
		
			  1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 
		
		
			 In cash terms
			 Total 14,654 15,460 16,969 17,718 18,623 19,817 20,842 
			 Funded by:
			 Government 2,369 2,564 2,712 2,763 2,440 2,178 2,925 
			 Research Councils 1,156 1,139 1,211 1,317 1,512 1,713 1,947 
			 Higher Education Funding Councils 1,033 1,085 1,157 1,276 1,474 1,626 1,665 
			 Higher Education 123 130 143 158 177 196 199 
			 Total Government 4,681 4,918 5,223 5,514 5,603 5,713 6,736 
			 
			 Business Enterprise 7,275 7,331 8,137 8,559 8,740 9,138 9,139 
			 Private Non-Profit 578 621 701 815 888 963 931 
			 Total Private 7,853 7,952 8,838 9,374 9,628 10,101 10,070 
			 
			 Abroad(17) 2,119 2,590 2,908 2,830 3,392 4,003 4,035 
		
	
	(17) Funded by overseas inward investment and EU programmes

Canvey Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what investigations are under way on a new access road for Canvey Island; which body is responsible for undertaking the investigations; and what the budget for the investigations is.

Stephen Ladyman: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 16 January 2006, Official Report, columns 930–31W.

Canvey Island

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the (a) terms of reference and (b) anticipated times of completion are for each investigation into a possible new access road for Canvey Island.

Stephen Ladyman: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 16 January 2006, Official Report, columns 930–31W.

Departmental Staff

Vincent Cable: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many people were employed by the (a) Driving Standards Agency, (b) Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, (c) Highways Agency, (d) Maritime and Coastguard Agency, (e) Office of Rail Regulation, (f) Department for Transport, (g) Vehicle Certification Agency and (h) Vehicle and Operator Services in each region in each of the last 12 months for which data is available; and how many and what percentage of posts were vacant in each month.

Karen Buck: The figures requested are published in Civil Service Statistics. Departments should refer to table A which covers staff numbers (FTE and headcount basis) for each organisation. Civil service statistics are available in the Library and at the following address on the Cabinet Office Statistics website: http://www.civilservice.gov.uk/management/statistics/index.asp
	The number of vacancies available within each Department/agency for the past 12 months can be found in the following table. These figures are based on the available data.
	
		Vacant posts for the last 12 months (by region where data available) 2005
		
			   Number of vacant posts and region 
			  Department/agency January February March April May June July 
		
		
			 DfT Central (London) 21 24 49 46 48 47 42 
			  Hastings 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 
			  Southampton 0 0 0 4 4 4 4 
			  Farnborough 7.5 8.5 8 6 7 8 6 
			  Bristol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 
			 DSA — (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— 
			 DVLA — (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— 
			  Highways 24 96 182 46 133 107 89 
			 MCA Southampton 6.84 3.41 2.41 11.06 8.68 8.37 5.5 
			  Eastern 14.7 15.91 12.88 20.66 14.66 14.01 10.23 
			  Wales and Western 8.49 10.08 12.51 15.65 12.65 12.12 8.06 
			  Scotland and Nl 9.42 10.61 10.61 14.61 13.47 10.87 12.88 
			 VCA — 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 
			 VOSA — 39 22 30 25 23 27 39 
		
	
	
		2005
		
			   Number of vacant posts and region 
			  Department/agency August September October November December Comments 
		
		
			 DfT Central(London) 43 44 39 40 37 — 
			  Hastings 1 1 1 0 0 Post transferred from London 
			  Southampton 4 5 5 5 6 MAIB vacant posts 
			  Farnborough 6 5 3 2 2 AAIB vacant posts 
			  Bristol 0 1 2 1 1 DVO central directorate 
			 DSA — (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— — 
			 DVLA — (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— (18)— — 
			  Highways 121 33 98 26 18 No breakdown of posts by region available 
			 MCA Southampton 7.5 7.19 14.42 9.51 8.94 MCA figures based on FTE. 
			  Eastern 10.05 6.66 6.97 7.97 7.97  
			  Wales and Western 6.87 14.55 15.8 14.66 13.01  
			  Scotland and Nl 13.42 14.94 12.53 13.93 13.36  
			 VCA — 0 0 0 0 0 No breakdown of posts by region available 
			 VOSA — 301 32 35 27 33 No breakdown of posts by region available 
		
	
	(18) No information available.
	Note:
	These figures are based on available data as not all business units keep records of vacant posts. It is not possible to provide the information requested as percentages.

High-risk Marine Areas

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what criteria were used by his Department to determine the marine areas for designation as marine environmental high risk areas.

Stephen Ladyman: In his report "Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas" Lord Donaldson charged the Department for Transport and the then Department of the Environment with determining how to identify MEHRAs. The Department for Transport, Department of the Environment and now Defra have worked closely with Devolved Administrations and statutory nature conservation advisors to develop the process for identifying MEHRAs through a robust and objective methodology. This included a parallel assessment of pollution from shipping risk and environmental sensitivity. Other environmental protection measures already in place at each location were also taken into consideration.
	The assessment of Coastal Pollution risk involved five distinct processes:
	1. Hazard identification
	2. Establishing ship routeing in UK waters
	3. The assessment of accident frequency
	4. The assessment of oil pollution spill frequency
	5. The ranking of coastal pollution risk
	The approach taken to the assessment of the environmental sensitivity of each coastal cell was developed from the considerations outlined in Lord Donaldson's report 'Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas'. The classification of sites was however expanded considerably to include the following categories:
	Wildlife designations and sites;
	Vulnerability of seabirds to oil pollution at identified sites;
	Fishing data, including fish farms, shell-fishing areas etc;
	Amenity/Economy, represented by locations such as Blue Flag Beaches, Marinas and Country Parks;
	Landscape, including Heritage Coastal, National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, and
	Geological, including World Heritage Sites and Conservation Review Sites
	In accordance with this methodology, only those areas which scored highly both in terms of environmental sensitivity and in terms of risk from shipping qualified as MEHRAs. They represent approximately 9 per cent. of the UK coastline, which is consistent with Lord Donaldson's view that not more than 10 per cent. of the UK coastline should qualify as MEHRAs.

Marine Environment

Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment of (a) environmental importance, (b) incidence of marine accidents and (c) risk was undertaken before deciding whether the coastal waters around (i) Cornwall and (ii) the Isles of Scilly should be designated as marine environmental high risk areas.

Stephen Ladyman: holding answer 6 March 2006
	I refer the hon. Member to the answer I have given him today (UIN 56551) on the criteria used to assess the location of Marine Environmental High Risk Areas (MEHRAs). These criteria included the key areas of environmental importance, accident frequency and pollution risk.
	In his report "Safer Ships, Cleaner Seas" Lord Donaldson said the criteria should be set in such a way that not more than about a tenth of the UK coastline qualifies. Consequently, in accordance with this principle and the methodology, only those areas which scored highly both in terms of environmental sensitivity and in terms of risk from shipping qualified as MEHRAs.

Maritime and Coastguard Agency

Alistair Carmichael: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the administration costs were of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency in (a) cash and (b) real terms in each year since 1997.

Stephen Ladyman: The figures are only available from 1998–99 onwards and are taken from the published accounts.
	
		
			£000 
			  Staff costs Establishment and accommodation costs Total 
		
		
			 2004–05 36,488 29,476 65,964 
			 2003–04 34,938 25,139 60,077 
			 2002–03 31,627 25,728 57,355 
			 2001–02 30,229 28,366 58,595 
			 2000–01 28,279 25,524 53,803 
			 1999–2000 26,290 25,926 52,216 
			 1998–99 25,646 20,133 45,779 
			 Total 213,497 170,504 384,001

Public Transport (Rural Areas)

Anthony Steen: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps the Government are taking to improve the provision of public transport in rural areas.

Karen Buck: The Government are committed to improving public transport in rural areas. Local and central Government provide funding of £1.7 billion annually to support bus services, which provide the majority of local public transport services, including those in rural areas.
	We are expecting all local transport authorities to include accessibility strategies in their next Local Transport Plans, due to be submitted this month. These strategies should be based on evidence and analysis of the problems people face in accessing jobs and essential services and facilities. They should include consideration of the accessibility and availability of local public transport. Our guidance to authorities makes clear that the strategies should take account of the particular needs of rural communities.
	Since 1998 nearly £450 million has been allocated by this Department to local authorities specifically for the support of rural bus services. The main element of this is rural bus subsidy grant (RBSG) which now totals £53 million annually and which supports some 2,000 services.
	Last year we announced "Kickstart" support, totalling £20 million, for 43 projects involving new and improved bus services which will become viable through growth in passenger numbers after an initial period of pump-priming from Government funds. 11 of these schemes will serve areas which are mainly rural in character.
	Demand-responsive, flexibly routed and community transport services have a particularly significant role to play in rural areas and we have encouraged their development. Many rural community transport services have since 2002 been eligible to receive the Department's bus service operators grant and regulations were introduced in 2004 to enable flexibly routed bus services to be registered with the Traffic Commissioner.

British Nuclear Deterrent

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the likely cost of replacing the British nuclear deterrent.

John Reid: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave on 20 October 2005, Official Report, column 1217W, to my hon. Friend the Member for Pendle (Mr. Prentice).

Overseas Deployments

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British soldiers are stationed abroad.

Adam Ingram: The numbers of personnel posted to each location abroad are shown in "Tri-Service Publication 6, Global Location of UK Regular Forces" (TSP 6).
	TSP 6 is published quarterly; the most recent publication shows the numbers of Service personnel at 1 October 2005.
	Copies of TSP 6 are available in the House of Commons Library and at www.dasa.mod.uk.

Royal Gibraltar Regiment

Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much was allocated to the Royal Gibraltar Regiment in each of the last 13 years.

Adam Ingram: Records of funding allocations are kept for only seven years; for the Royal Gibraltar Regiment, these allocations, including those for the current financial year, are as follows:
	
		
			  £ million 
			 Financial year Amount 
		
		
			 1998–99 3.589 
			 1999–2000 3.714 
			 2000–01 4.198 
			 2001–02 4.393 
			 2002–03 4.669 
			 2003–04 4.860 
			 2004–05 5.019 
			 2005–06 5.280

Child Support

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many staff were employed as part of the Child Support Agency contingency team in Liverpool and how many were assigned to the new CS2 system; and how many of them were assigned to the legacy Child Support computer system at the end of each of the last 18 months for which figures are available.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Stephen Geraghty
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many staff were employed as part of the Child Support Agency contingency team in Liverpool and how many were assigned to the new CS2 system; and how many of them were assigned to the legacy Child Support computer system at the end of each of the last 18 months for which figures are available.
	The Contingency Team in Liverpool supports the six Child Support Agency centres by answering calls remotely which require access to the legacy Child Support computer system (CSCS). The Contingency Team call-handlers do not deal with calls relating to the new CS2 computer system.
	The attached table shows the number of staff employed as part of the Contingency Team in Liverpool at the end of each of the last 18 months.
	I hope you find this response helpful.
	
		Staff employed as part of the Liverpool contingency team Number
		
			  Staff employed(19) 
		
		
			 August 2004 42.13 
			 September 2004 43.31 
			 October 2004 44.53 
			 November 2004 42.89 
			 December 2004 44.2 
			 January 2005 41.58 
			 February 2005 41.58 
			 March 2005 44.17 
			 April 2005 43.77 
			 May 2005 39.37 
			 June 2005 39.87 
			 July 2005 40.47 
			 August 2005 38.83 
			 September 2005 39.03 
			 October 2005 38.43 
			 November 2005 52.48 
			 December 2005 52.48 
			 January 2006 61.68 
		
	
	(19) Full-time equivalent.

Child Support

Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total number of staff employed in each of the six Child Support Agency call centres was in the UK; how many staff in each call centre were assigned to the legacy Child Support computer system at the end of each of the last 24 months for which figures are available; and how many were assigned to the new CS2 system.

James Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
	Letter from Stephen Geraghty
	In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the chief Executive.
	You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the total number of staff employed in each of the six Child Support Agency call centres was in the UK; how many staff in each call centre were assigned to the legacy Child Support computer system at the end of each of the last 24 months for which figures are available; and how many were assigned to the new CS2 system.
	There is a National Helpline team situated in each of the Agency's six centres. The attached table shows the number of National Helpline staff in each of these teams.
	Staff on the National Helpline multi-task between the legacy Child Support Computer System and the new CS2 system according to customer demand.
	I hope you find this response helpful.
	
		
			Number 
			  Belfast Birkenhead Dudley Falkirk Hastings Plymouth Total 
		
		
			 February 2004 80.63 58.44 76.93 81.38 57.45 73.69 428.52 
			 March 2004 86.63 58.42 77.94 78.41 44.01 63.18 408.59 
			 April 2004 88.23 60.30 70.25 79.32 51.95 70.84 420.89 
			 May 2004 86.34 57.84 73.95 74.91 52.81 70.75 416.6 
			 June 2004 83.13 57.27 71.68 75.91 53.40 66.48 407.87 
			 July 2004 82.23 58.88 70.68 61.92 52.40 65.06 391.17 
			 August 2004 79.14 56.88 70.15 61.92 51.12 62.69 381.9 
			 September 2004 84.95 55.19 68.69 61.55 52.18 61.74 384.3 
			 October 2004 81.93 54.13 68.18 58.69 49.83 55.92 368.68 
			 November 2004 79.43 51.88 68.18 61.78 45.15 55.57 361.99 
			 December 2004 79.93 61.48 65.00 64.11 47.41 56.08 374.01 
			 January 2005 77.03 59.25 65.57 55.82 46.51 54.99 359.17 
			 February 2005 78.03 58.95 65.57 55.82 46.51 54.99 359.87 
			 March 2005 78.39 55.65 61.71 59.30 45.78 68.99 369.82 
			 April 2005 84.48 53.69 61.17 59.74 46.55 71.96 377.59 
			 May 2005 86.34 54.67 61.22 59.95 44.62 69.00 375.8 
			 June 2005 85.34 58.10 61.21 60.39 43.61 60.64 369.29 
			 July 2005 84.14 55.67 59.47 59.41 42.62 68.23 369.54 
			 August 2005 78.14 54.67 59.64 59.22 40.81 65.77 358.25 
			 September 2005 75.14 52.63 59.09 60.17 40.11 64.16 351.3 
			 October 2005 79.64 54.58 57.15 61.62 39.68 64.77 357.44 
			 November 2005 93.18 56.58 59.64 63.91 42.63 64.28 380.22 
			 December 2005 95.28 55.23 59.07 62.19 37.10 62.75 371.62 
			 January 2006 92.28 58.93 59.56 62.82 47.96 68.97 390.52 
		
	
	Note:
	The figures are whole-time equivalent and include management and support staff in addition to call-handling staff.

Employment Advisers (GP Surgeries)

Danny Alexander: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 
	(1)  what plans he has to pilot the placement of employment advisers in general practitioner surgeries; and if he will make a statement;
	(2)  what funds will be made available for the placement of employment advisers in general practitioner surgeries; what assessment he has made of the merits of the use of employment advisers from (a) Jobcentre Plus, (b) private companies and (c) voluntary organisations; and if he will make a statement.

Margaret Hodge: As part of the Pathways to Work approach Jobcentre Plus has been working closely with a wide range of NHS professionals in surgeries and other health settings to promote the health and employment message. Some non-governmental organisations have already placed employment advisers in general practitioner surgeries across the country and our proposals came from this experience.
	We want to build on the knowledge gained from these experiments and will be running pilots in five of the seven current Pathways to Work Pilot areas, where we will place employment advisers in general practitioner surgeries. We have already begun piloting this in two surgeries in Bridgend and Paisley. All pilots will be in place by April 2006 and will continue until March 2008.
	The pilot will examine if an outreach service in health settings is a good way to engage with people who have a health condition or disability. In particular, we want to see if it is an effective method to reach those who do not currently access work focused support. The lessons learned from these pilots will help to ensure the success of our proposals recently published in our Green Paper; "A new deal for welfare: Empowering people to Work". Any decisions on future roll out or methodology, as part of the Pathways approach, will be taken following an evaluation of the pilot.

Departmental Services (Expenditure)

Jo Swinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much (a) her Department and (b) its agencies spent on (i) electricity use and (ii) water and sewerage services in each year since 1997.

Richard Caborn: In the last five years DCMS expenditure is as follows:
	
		
			   £ 
			  Electricity Water and sewerage 
		
		
			 2000–01 283,931 n/a 
			 2001–02 273,750 n/a 
			 2002–03 276,019 11,138 
			 2003–04 253,616 11,991 
			 2004–05 224,929 12,846 
		
	
	Data for earlier years are not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
	Data for the Royal Parks are as follows:
	
		
			£ 
			  Electricity Water and sewerage 
		
		
			 1997–98 332,323 218,900 
			 1998–99 258,096 231,671 
			 1999–2000 213,269 244,680 
			 2000–01 228,428 237,969 
			 2001–02 208,763 190,426 
			 2002–03 245,005 260,542 
			 2003–04 270,154 292,341 
			 2004–05 270,601 211,058

International Sporting Events

Hugh Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 16 February 2006, Official Report, column 2198W, on international sporting events, if she will list the individuals concerned; and for what reasons each is visiting the Commonwealth Games.

Richard Caborn: holding answer 6 March 2006
	The following table sets out the names and positions of the individuals who are planning to visit the Commonwealth Games and their reasons for doing so, as listed in my answer of 16 February 2006.
	At the time of my previous answer, Sport England had planned to send six members of staff to the Commonwealth to represent the organisation; this total subsequently fell to three.
	For the sake of completeness, I have included in the list a further seven Sport England employees who were not counted for the purposes of my previous answer because they will not in any way represent or work for Sport England at the Commonwealth Games, but will be seconded either to Team England or to the Commonwealth Games Council for England (CGCE) for the duration of their stay. I have also included David Higgins, who is temporarily on the Department's payroll pending establishment of the Olympic Delivery Authority.
	
		
			 Name Position Organisation Reason for travel 
		
		
			 Tessa Jowell MP Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport DCMS Official visit to support British teams 
			 Richard Caborn MP Minister for Sport DCMS Official visit to support British teams and attend meeting of Commonwealth Sports Ministers 
			 Helen MacNamara PPS/Tessa Jowell DCMS Accompanying Tessa Jowell 
			  PS/Richard Caborn DCMS Accompanying Richard Caborn 
			 Nicola Roche Director for Sport DCMS Meetings with Australian officials and accompanying Secretary of State 
			  Press officer DCMS Accompanying Richard Caborn 
			 David Higgins Chief Executive Designate ODA DCMS Attending to learn lessons from how Melbourne is staging the Games, how they are handling security and how the delivery of the facilities will leave a sustainable legacy for the city. 
			 Sue Campbell Chair UK Sport Chairing meeting of Commonwealth Advisory Body on Sport (CABOS), various meetings, including lunch with Australian Minister (TBC). 
			 John Scott International Director UK Sport Attending CABOS meeting and others with eg Australian Sports Commission and Sydney Olympic Park Authority. 
			 Liz Nicholl Director of Performance UK Sport Attending International Association of High Performance Sports Training Centres (IAHPSTC) Board Meetings 13–14 March. Taking overview of performances across UK teams. 
			 Peter Keen Performance Advisor UK Sport Attending various meetings, eg with Commonwealth Games Associations. Taking an overview of performances across UK teams. 
			 
			 Darlene Harrison Coaching Consultant UK Sport Attendance at swimming holding camp on Gold Coast and coach seminar at Essendon football club. Pre-arranged meetings with elite coaches across sport in respect of potential future coaching need and numbers for 2012. 
			 Lord Patrick Carter(20) Chair Sport England Representing Sport England 
			 Stephen Baddeley(20) Interim Chief Executive Sport England Representing Sport England 
			 Sir Andrew Foster* Main Board Member Sport England Representing Sport England 
			 Matt Crawcour Head of Media UK Sport Secondment as Press Attaché to Team England 
			 Neil Livesey IT Manager UK Sport IT Support for Elite Athlete Medical Records system 
			 Hamish McInnes(21) Head of Governing Bodies Sport England Seconded to Team England as senior HQ staff liaison and support 
			 Petta Naylor(21) Events Manager Sport England Seconded to Team England to provide holding camp support; Team England events support during the Games. 
			 Sandra Phillips(21) Events Manager Sport England Event support for Team England stakeholder events during the Games period. 
			 Vivien Smiley(21) Communications Manager Sport England Seconded to Team England as a Press Officer 
			 Di Horsley Senior Development Manager- National Governing Bodies Team Sport England Seconded to Team England as HQ staff in the athletes village and at competition events 
			 Linda Freeman(22) Senior Development Manager- National Governing Bodies Team Sport England Seconded to Team England to provide HQ support in the athletes village and at competition events 
			 Trudi Else(23) Client / Project Manager Sport England Seconded to Team England to provide HQ support in the athletes village and at events. 
			 
			 Dr. Bruce Hamilton Sports Physician EIS Secondment to UK Athletics 
			 Neil Black Lead Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to UK Athletics 
			 Dr. Kirsten Barnes Lead Sports Psychologist EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Nigel Mitchell Lead Nutritionist EIS Secondment to England cycling team 
			 Paula Clayton Sports Masseur EIS Secondment to England diving team 
			 Dr. Simon Till Sports Physician EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Pat Dunleavy Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to England swimming team 
			 Fiona Blakelock Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to England triathlon team 
			 Lynda Daley Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Dr. Nick Peirce Sports Physician EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Dr. Shauna McGibbon Sports Physician EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Mike Peyrebrune Physiologist EIS Secondment to England swimming team 
			 Matt Parker Physiologist EIS Secondment to England cycling team 
			 Stafford Murray Lead Performance Analyst EIS Secondment to England squash team 
			 Andy Harrison Physiologist EIS Presenting at 13th Commonwealth International Sport Conference (24) 
			 Mark Simpson Strength and conditioning Coach EIS Presenting at 13th Commonwealth International Sport Conference 
			 Mike Hughes Performance Analyst EIS Secondment to England cycling team 
			 Gavin Thomas Physiologist EIS Secondment to England cycling team 
			 Ashleigh Wallace Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to England hockey team 
			 Pete Atkinson Strength and conditioning Coach EIS Secondment to England hockey team 
			 
			 Dr. Mike Rossiter Sports Physician EIS Secondment to England hockey team 
			 Dr. Cathy Speed Sports Physician EIS Secondment to England badminton team 
			 Nicki Combarro Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to England badminton team 
			 Dr. Ian McCurdie Sports Physician EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Dr. Mike Loosemore Sports Physician EIS Secondment to CGCE/England boxing team 
			 Matt Lancaster Physiotherapist EIS Secondment to England athletics team 
			 Claire Furlong Head of Media Affairs EIS Secondment to CGCE 
			 Mike Calvin Deputy Director EIS Presenting at 13th Commonwealth International Sport Conference and representing EIS 
			 Wilma Shakespeare National Director EIS Representing EIS 
		
	
	(20) Visit funded by Sport England
	(21) Part funded by Sport England and the Commonwealth Games Council for England (CGCE)
	(22) Funded by the CGCE
	(23) Flights paid for by individual
	(24) The 13th Commonwealth International Sport Conference takes place on 9–12 March in Melbourne. More information at http://www.cisc2006.com/Pub/pStart.asp

Library Services

Philip Hollobone: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment she has made of the impact on book lending rates and library usage of the level of security and protection in public libraries.

James Purnell: There are no data gathered, which attempt to make the link between lending levels, usage levels and security levels within public libraries. However public libraries are usually regarded as trusted and safe spaces for people to use information, acquire knowledge and enjoy reading and discovery.
	The level and type of security employed at public libraries is a matter for the parent authorities.

Algeria and Ivory Coast

Si�n James: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the political situation in (a) Algeria and (b) Ivory Coast.

Ian Pearson: Algeria's President Bouteflika was voted in for a second term of office in April 2004, in elections judged by independent monitors to reflect the will of the Algerian people. Algeria has since continued to enjoy increasing security and political stability. In September 2005, the Algeria people voted in a referendum for a Charter for Peace and National Reconciliation. We welcomed the participation of the Algeria people in this process. Algeria strengthened its links with the EU when its Association Agreement under the EU's Euromed partnership came into force in autumn last year.
	The peace process in Cte d'Ivoire is at a critical stage. International mediation efforts are continuing with the aim of completing all the necessary work needed for elections to be held before the 31 October deadline set by the African Union and UN. We fully support the international community in this role. A meeting was held in Yamoussoukro on 28 February which was attended by key Ivorian figures. We warmly commend this meeting as a useful step in creating a greater understanding between all the parties involved.

British Overseas Territories

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance his Department is giving to British Overseas Territories to negotiate their share of EU regional grants.

Douglas Alexander: The UK Overseas Territories (OTs) are not eligible for regional grants from the European Regional Development Fund as they are not full members of the EU. Rather, they are associated to the EU through the UK, their parent member state, and their access to EU funding is governed by the Council Decision of 27 November 2001 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Community (Overseas Association Decision). The main source of funding for the OTs is a specific allocation within the European Development Fund. They are also eligible to benefit from other budget lines and community programmes set out in Annex II E and II F of the Overseas Association Decision.
	To give practical support to the UK OTs, my Department has a member of staff whose primary functions are to assist the Territories in accessing EU funding, and to represent their interests at the European Union. In this he works closely with members of the Office of the United Kingdom Permanent Representative to the European Union.

British Overseas Territories

Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps he is taking to help British overseas territories to gain access to EU markets.

Douglas Alexander: The UK Overseas Territories' (OTs) access to EU markets is governed by the Council Decision of 27 November 2001, on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Community (Overseas Association Decision), which was agreed between member states. The Territories were not involved directly in the discussion of the Decision, but were consulted by their parent member state (the UK). The Decision contains a section dealing with economic and trade co-operation between the overseas territories and the European Community. The Preferential Trade Regime is, we understand, the most beneficial ever granted by the EU in terms of market access.
	The Current Decision covers the period 200111. The UK OTs will again be consulted when the Decision comes up for review, which we expect to be towards the end of the current period.

Departmental Telephone Numbers

Anne Milton: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs if she will list the (a) 0800, (b) 0845 and (c) 0870 telephone numbers for the public administered by (i) her Department and (ii) public bodies which report to the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs.

Harriet Harman: The Department, including its Agencies, has a total of eleven 0800 numbers; fifty four 0845 numbers and fifty three 0870 numbers. A list of the numbers is as follows.
	0800
	0800 0156510
	0800 3121159
	0800 3583506
	0800 3121159
	0800 7833314
	0800 0850982
	0800 4320432
	0800 0685029
	0800 0685038
	0800 0685048
	0800 0560559
	0845
	0845 6045935
	0845 3302964
	0845 3302962
	0845 3302963
	0845 3455303
	0845 3455484
	0845 4565150
	08454568770
	0845 4085302
	0845 4085303
	0845 4085314
	0845 4085315
	0845 4085316
	0845 4085317
	0845 4085318
	0845 6000730
	0845 6000710
	0845 6000736
	0845 9616473
	0845 6060766
	0845 3555567
	0845 3555155
	0845 4085304
	0845 4085305
	0845 4085306
	0845 4085310
	0845 4085311
	0845 4085312
	0845 4085313
	0845 4085322
	0845 6015889
	0845 4085319
	0845 6000722
	0845 6000788
	0845 6000629
	0845 6022064
	0845 6015889
	0845 7078607
	0845 015935
	0845 7045007
	0845 6020012
	0845 6020015
	0845 6020013
	0845 6020016
	0845 6020014
	0845 6017124
	0845 6017136
	0845 6017125
	0845 6066035
	0845 6017134
	0845 6000490
	0845 3302900
	0845 7078607
	0845 7045007
	0870
	0870 2204100
	0870 2204101
	0870 2204102
	0870 2204103
	0870 2204104
	0870 2204105
	0870 2204106
	0870 2204107
	0870 2204108
	0870 2204109
	0870 2204110
	0870 2204111
	0870 2204112
	0870 2204113
	0870 2204114
	0870 2204115
	0870 2204116
	0870 2204117
	0870 2204118
	0870 2204134
	0870 2204135
	0870 2204136
	0870 2204137
	0870 2204138
	0870 2204139
	0870 2204411
	0870 2410109
	0870 9088060
	0870 9088062
	0870 9088063
	0870 9088069
	0870 0108318
	0870 0100299
	0870 0200026
	0870 0100910
	0870 0101116
	0870 0101117
	0870 0101221

Rape Trials

Sandra Gidley: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many defendants to allegations of rape in the criminal courts were allowed personally to cross-examine the complainant in England in 2005.

Fiona Mactaggart: I have been asked to reply.
	Section 34 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (YJCEA), which came into force on four September 2000, prohibits a person charged with rape and other sexual offences from cross-examining the complainant (whether adult or child) in any criminal proceedings. Owing to this, no statistics are collected centrally, and the Government are not aware of any cases in which this prohibition has been breached.
	Legislative provisions in the Criminal Justice Act 1991 introduced a prohibition on unrepresented defendants personally cross-examining child witnesses in sexual offence cases (including rape) and cases of violence or cruelty. They came into force on one October 1992 (section 55(7)). This ban was extended to cases where the defendant was charged with kidnapping, false imprisonment or abduction by section 35 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 (YJCEA), which came into force on four September 2000.

Coleraine Rail and Bus Station

Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what percentage of trains arriving at and leaving from Coleraine Rail and Bus Station during 2005 did so within five minutes of the timetabled time.

Shaun Woodward: Information is not readily available to directly answer the question as punctuality data is held only in respect of end of line stations, and only in respect of whether or not trains arrive within 10 minutes of their timetabled arrival times. However punctuality information for the closest end of line stations at Londonderry and Portrush could be used as a proxy for times at Coleraine station.
	The percentage of trains arriving at the Londonderry and Portrush stations with 10 minutes of the timetabled time in 2005 was 68 per cent. and 90 per cent. respectively.

Janine Murtagh

Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what issues were raised in the letter to the Health Minister from the coroner investigating the death of Janine Murtagh in the Royal Victoria hospital on 18 November 2002.

Shaun Woodward: HM Coroner raised 13 issues in his letter of 22 November 2004 to the Health Minister. These were:
	1. Whether there is a need for further training of all surgical, anaesthetic and theatre staff in relation to the use of emergency theatres. Does the existing protocol provide sufficient clarity?
	2. Whether there is a need for a more formal structure governing contact with theatres in relation to theatre availability and a recording of any such contacts to include what was discussed, by whom, and any decisions made.
	3. The training needs of locum surgical staff.
	4. Whether it should be a requirement for a doctor who is called by nursing staff to examine a patient whose condition has given rise to some measure of concern, to consult with the senior nurse on duty in the ward and any family members who are present at the time.
	5. Whether, under present arrangements, consultants are kept adequately informed about such interventions, assessments subsequently made and any changes in the condition of their patient.
	6. Whether it is appropriate for a staff nurse to be able to discontinue patient observations without consulting anyone else.
	7. The role of a Ward Sister and whether she is always deemed to be a member of the team responsible for each patient in her ward.
	8. Whether there is any confusion amongst surgical and anaesthetic staff as to the chain of responsibility for a patient at the various stages of their treatment and the circumstances in which responsibility changes.
	9. Record keeping.
	10. The efficacy of a written patient care management plan.
	11. Transfer arrangements between the Royal Maternity hospital and the Royal Victoria hospital.
	12. Whether there is a need for a formal recording of a notification of bed availability by the Bed Manager, to include the name of the person to whom it was made and an acknowledgement by that person of the notification. Should the notification by the Bed Manager be to the surgeon concerned or any member of the ward staff?
	13. Whether there is substance in the allegations of the consultant general surgeons who signed the letter to the Chief Executive of the Royal Group of hospitals of obstruction getting gravely ill patients into theatre for necessary surgery.

Licensing

Nigel Dodds: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what account the consultation of the New Strategic Direction for Alcohol and Drugs (200611) will take of the recent consultation on liquor licensing reform; and if he will make a statement.

Shaun Woodward: Both the development of the New Strategic Direction for Alcohol and Drugs and its current consultation have taken due account of the Liquor Licensing Review consultation and this continues. I anticipate that the final New Strategic Direction document, to be launched in May, will bear due testimony to that.

Neighbourhood Policing

Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he expects the implementation of neighbourhood policing teams to be completed in each police force.

Hazel Blears: The Government is working closely with ACPO to ensure that, by 2008, every area in England and Wales will benefit from dedicated, visible, accessible and responsive neighbourhood policing. A programme to deliver on this commitment is well under way, and some areas have already moved to a neighbourhood policing approach. The timing of the full implementation of neighbourhood policing teams will be different for every force. There is no one size fits all approach to neighbourhood policing, and each force must develop, tailor and test an approach which will be appropriate to local issues and circumstances.

Neighbourhood Policing

David Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what his estimate is of the average population to be covered by neighbourhood policing teams.

Hazel Blears: The Government are committed to ensuring that, by 2008, every area in England and Wales will benefit from dedicated, visible, accessible and responsive neighbourhood policing. The size of the neighbourhood which will be served by a neighbourhood policing team will vary depending on local needs and circumstances. A neighbourhood will not mean the same to an inner-city resident as to someone living in a predominantly rural area.
	Typically though, we would expect it to cover one or two council wards. The important thing will be that each neighbourhood will have a dedicated team, and that residents will know their local officers and be able easily to contact them.

Prisons

Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what proportion of the prison population had (a) learning disabilities, (b) mental health problems and (c) learning difficulties and mental health problems in the most recent period for which figures are available.

Fiona Mactaggart: In 1997 the Office for National Statistics undertook a survey of mental ill health in the prison population of England and Wales. It reported both on prevalence of mental disorder and on the intellectual functioning of remanded and sentenced prisoners. Further information is available in the report of this survey: Psychiatric Morbidity Amongst Prisoners in England and Wales (1998) a copy of which is available in the Library and on the ONS website.

Prisons

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much his Department spent on the Assisted Prisoners' Visits Scheme in each of the last five years for which figures are available; and what the budget was for the scheme in each year.

Fiona Mactaggart: Assisted Prison Visits Scheme expenditure is in the following table.
	Expenditure includes bank charges, special printing translation costs etc. directly related to the scheme.
	Total number of visits paid in 200405 was 61,988.
	
		
			
			  Budget Expenditure 
		
		
			 200001 1,986,000 1,964,345 
			 200102 1,825,000 1,762,048 
			 200203 1,796,000 1,712,783 
			 200304 1,892,920 1,822,499 
			 200405 1,947,000 1,870,386

Prisons

Edward Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) adult prisoners and (b) prisoners in young offender institutions were (i) in full-time employment, (ii) self-employed, (iii) unemployed and claiming benefits, (iv) in full-time education and (v) on a (A) Government and (B) industry training course at time of sentencing in each of the last five years for which figures are available.

Fiona Mactaggart: There is no routinely collected data on the employment status of prisoners at the time of sentence. However, the resettlement surveys conducted in 2001, 2003 and 2004 asked a representative sample of prisoners approaching release what they were doing in the four weeks immediately before custody. Results from these figures are in the following table. No details on the type of courses attended are available from these surveys.
	
		Employment status in the four weeks immediately prior to custody: Figures from the 2001, 2003 and 2004 resettlement surveys(39) Percentage
		
			 Adult prisoners 2001 2003 2004 All three years 
		
		
			 ETE in the four weeks before custody  
			 Working full-time(40) 25.4 24.8 21.2 23.8 
			 Working part-time(41) 4.0 3.6 2.3 3.3 
			 Doing temporary/casual work 1.7 1.4 1.6 1.6 
			 In full-time education/training(42) 0.4 0.4 0.6 0.5 
			 In part-time education(43) 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.3 
			 Unemployed, seeking work 26.2 23.4 26.3 25.3 
			 Unemployed, not seeking work 14.5 14.5 14.2 14.4 
			 Looking after home or family 1.9 1.1 1.5 1.5 
			 On a Government training scheme 0.7 0.4 0.3 0.5 
			 Retired from paid work 0.8 0.2 0.8 0.6 
			 Long-term sick or disabled 14.7 14.0 16.7 15.1 
			 Living off crime 7.6 13.7 10.7 10.6 
			 Other 2.0 2.1 3.3 1.9 
			 All 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
			  
			 Number of cases in survey 1369 1306 1298 3973 
		
	
	
		Percentage
		
			 Young prisoners 2001 2003 2004 All three years 
		
		
			 ETE in the four weeks before custody  
			 Working full-time 22.9 18.8 22.8 21.5 
			 Working part-time 3.2 4.7 3.8 3.9 
			 Doing temporary/casual work 2.9 2.8 2.9 2.9 
			 In full-time education/training 4.5 2.5 5.3 4.1 
			 In part-time education 1.1 0.8 0.0 0.6 
			 Unemployed, seeking work 29.5 29.3 25.1 28.1 
			 Unemployed, not seeking work 17.6 19.6 15.8 17.7 
			 Looking after home or family 0.5 1.7 0.3 0.8 
			 On a Government training scheme 1.1 1.7 0.6 1.1 
			 Long-term sick or disabled 2.7 2.8 4.1 3.1 
			 Living off crime 10.6 13.5 17.3 13.7 
			 Other 3.5 1.9 2.0 1.9 
			 All 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 
			  
			 Number of cases in survey 376 362 342 1080 
		
	
	(39) As this is a sample rather a census, the results are subject to sampling error.
	(40) 30 or more hours a week.
	(41) Less than 30 hours a week.
	(42) 16 or more hours of classwork/instruction per week.
	(43) Less than 16 hours of classwork/instruction per week.
	Source:
	RDS NOMS.

Young Offenders

Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps the Government are taking to prevent young offenders from re-offending; and if he will make a statement.

Fiona Mactaggart: The Government have made good progress on reducing juvenile re-offending given the problems young offenders pose and face. Latest available figures show reconviction rates of young offenders fell by 2.4 per cent. between 2000 and 2003, once the changes in offender characteristics between cohorts had been adjusted for.
	The Youth Justice Board (YJB) is pursuing a comprehensive programme to improve practice and performance on the ground and strengthen disposals. The programme includes improvements to practice through the publication and use of guidance on Key Elements of Effective Practice; improvement to youth offending team performance; improving the knowledge and skills of the youth justice work force; developing IT programmes to support youth justice services; extension and enhancement of the Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programme; and a focus on developing access to key services that can address the risk factors associated with young people offending including education, training and employment, accommodation, substance misuse and health services.
	The YJB is also taking the lead on the resettlement of young people leaving custody and on 20 February, with a range of agencies, the YJB published Youth Resettlement: A Framework for Action setting out a co-ordinated approach to improving the resettlement of young offenders.

Alzheimer's Disease

Sammy Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps the Government is taking to help those suffering with Alzheimer's disease.

Liam Byrne: The Department's policy on the treatment and support of those with Alzheimer's disease is stipulated in the mental health standard of the older people's national service framework.
	This policy has been reinforced with the publication of our service development guide, Everybody's Business, which outlines the key components of a comprehensive older people's mental health service including dementia care.

Dentistry

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what percentage of the (a) adult and (b) child population of (i) York and Selby Primary Care Trust area, (ii) Yorkshire and the Humber and (iii) England was registered with an NHS general dental practitioner in (A) 1997 and (B) each year since then.

Rosie Winterton: The table provide information on the estimated percentage of the populations of Selby and York Primary Care Trust (PCT), North and East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire Health Authority (HA) and England registered with general dental services and personal dental services dentists as at 30 September each year since 1997.
	
		Percentage
		
			  Under 18 18 plus 
		
		
			 Selby and York PCT 
			 1997 77 51 
			 1998 72 47 
			 1999 71 47 
			 2000 76 50 
			 2001 74 51 
			 2002 73 51 
			 2003 80 58 
			 2004 64 42 
			 2005 72 48 
			  
			 North and East Yorkshire and North Lincolnshire HA 
			 1997 70 52 
			 1998 66 47 
			 1999 67 48 
			 2000 69 49 
			 2001 68 48 
			 2002 67 47 
			 2003 67 48 
			 2004 63 44 
			 2005 65 45 
			
			 England   
			 1997 66 53 
			 1998 61 45 
			 1999 62 45 
			 2000 63 46 
			 2001 63 45 
			 2002 63 45 
			 2003 63 45 
			 2004 61 43 
			 2005 62 44 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. The drop in registrations between September 1997 and September 1998 is mostly attributable to the reduction in re-registration period from two years to 15 months.
	2. The percentages of the population registered with a dentist (or registration rate) have been estimated by including patient registrations in the area of the dentist, that is according to the postcode of the dental surgery and not the patient's address. Therefore, the registration rates for some areas may be affected by some patients receiving dental treatment in a different area from the one in which they live.
	Source:
	National Health Service Health and Social Care Information Centre

Dentistry

Hugh Bayley: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many full-time equivalent NHS general dental practitioners there were in the York and Selby Primary Care Trust area in each year since 1997.

Rosie Winterton: Information on a full-time equivalent basis is not available. Dentists are able to vary the amount of hours they work and to vary their national health service commitment. Many dentists do some private work.
	Numbers of dentists with a general dental services (CDS) or personal dental services (PDS) contract are shown in the table.
	
		General Dental Services (CDS) and Personal Dental Services (PDS) Numbers of dentists within Selby and York Primary Care Trust (PCT) as at 30 September each year
		
			  Selby and York PCT 
		
		
			 1997 105 
			 1998 113 
			 1999 117 
			 2000 117 
			 2001 128 
			 2002 131 
			 2003 136 
			 2004 136 
			 2005 148 
		
	
	Notes:
	1. Data includes all notifications of dentists joining or leaving the CDS or PDS, received by the Dental Practice Board, up to 19 October 2005. Figures for the numbers of dentists at specified dates may vary depending upon the notification period, for example data with a later notification period will include more recent notifications of dentists joining or leaving the GDS or PDS.
	2. Dentists include principals, assistants and trainees. Prison contracts have been excluded from the data.
	3. The postcode of the dental practice was used to allocate dentists to specific geographic areas. PCT areas have been defined using the Office for National Statistics All Fields Postcode Directory.
	Source:
	Dental Practice Board

Diabetic Nurses

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the guidelines are on the provision of specialist diabetic nurses for (a) adults and (b) children.

Rosie Winterton: The national service framework for diabetes: delivery strategy states
	diabetes services need to ensure that there are enough staff with appropriate skills who are well-led, supported, and deliver high-quality care.
	It is up to local diabetes teams based on the needs of their local population to decide how best these teams are constructed to provide local services for both adults and children.

General Practitioners (Take-home Pay)

Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the average take-home pay was for general practitioners in (a) England and (b) Beverley and Holderness in each of the last 10 years; and if she will make a statement.

Liam Byrne: Information on the average take-home pay for general practitioners in England and Beverley and Holderness is not collected centrally. However, figures based on information for Great Britain are available, which is shown in the following table.
	
		
			   
			  Intended average net remuneration/income 
		
		
			 199394 40,610 
			 199495 41,890 
			 199596 43,165 
			 199697 44,483 
			 199798 46,031 
			 199899 48,037 
			 19992000 52,606 
			 200001 54,219 
			 200102 56,510 
			 200203 61,618 
			 200304(45) 67,040 
		
	
	(45) Forecast figures.

Midwives

Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many vacant midwife posts there are in (a) the Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire strategic health authority area and (b) the Peterborough and Stamford hospitals NHS foundation hospitals trust area; and what plans her Department has to recruit more midwives into the NHS in Cambridgeshire.

Rosie Winterton: The table provides national health service three-month vacancies for qualified midwifery staff by NHS trust in the Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire area.
	The NHS Improvement Plan, published in June 2004, reiterated the Government's commitment to increase numbers of frontline NHS staff. This built on the NHS Plan which made a commitment to increasing nursing staff numbersover 20,000 more nurses working in the NHS and 5,500 extra nurses, midwives and health visitors being trained each year by 2004. These targets have already been met and exceeded. The extra investment announced in the 2002 Budget, builds on the NHS Plan target; by 2008 we expect the NHS to have net increases of at least 35,000 nurses, midwives and health visitors.
	The NHS in Cambridgeshire in common with other areas, will benefit from the contribution of these additions to the NHS work force.
	
		Health and social care information centre vacancies survey March 2005. National health service three-month vacancies for qualified midwifery staff in Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire strategic health authority area by organisation. Three-month vacancy rates, numbers and staff in post.
		
			   Midwives 
			   March 2005 September 2004 
			   Three month vacancy rate (percentage) Three month vacancy number (Staff in post) full-time equivalent (Staff in post) headcount 
		
		
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire Strategic Health Authority area Total Q0l 1.4 10 694 1,125 
			 Broadland PCT 5JL 0 0 0 0 
			 Cambridge City PCT 5JH 0 0 0 0 
			 Cambridge University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RGT 0.9 1 111 143 
			 Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust RT1 0 0 0 0 
			 Central Suffolk PCT 5JT 0 0 0 0 
			 East Anglian Ambulance NHS Trust RMZ 0 0 0 0 
			 East Cambridgeshire and Fenland PCT 5JK 0 0 0 0 
			 Great Yarmouth PCT 5GT 0 0 0 0 
			 Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust RQQ 5.2 3 58 74 
			 Huntingdonshire PCT 5GF 0.0 0 1 1 
			 Ipswich Hospital NHS Trust RGQ 0.0 0 101 131 
			 Ipswich PCT 5JQ 0 0 0 0 
			 James Paget Healthcare NHS Trust RGP 0.0 0 56 77 
			 Kings Lynn and Wisbech Hospitals NHS Trust RCX 1.5 1 66 95 
			 Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust RMY 0 0 0 0 
			 Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital NHS Trust RM1 2.9 4 144 377 
			 Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire SHA QOl 0 0 0 0 
			 North Norfolk PCT 5JM 0 0 0 0 
			 North Peterborough PCT 5AF 0 0 0 0 
			 Norwich PCT 5A2 0 0 0 0 
			 Papworth Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RGM 0 0 0 0 
			 Peterborough Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust RGN 0.0 0 88 129 
			 South Cambridgeshire PCT 5JJ 0 0 0 0 
			 South Peterborough PCT SAG 0 0 0 0 
			 Southern Norfolk PCT 5G1 0 0 0 0 
			 Suffolk Coastal PCT 5JR 0 0 0 0 
			 Suffolk Mental Health Partnership NHS Trust RT6 0 0 0 0 
			 Suffolk West PCT 5JW 0 0 0 0 
			 Waveney PCT 5JV 0 0 0 0 
			 West Norfolk PCT 5CY 0 0 0 0 
			 West Suffolk Hospitals NHS Trust RGR 0.0 0 69 98 
		
	
	Notes:
	Three month vacancy:
	1. Three month vacancy information is as at 31 March 2005.
	2. Three month vacancies are vacancies which trusts are actively trying to fill, which had lasted for three months or more (whole time equivalents).
	3. Three month vacancy rates are three month vacancies expressed as a percentage of three month vacancies plus staff in post.
	4. Three month vacancy rates are calculated using staff in post from the Non-Medical Workforce Census September 2004.
	5. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place.
	6. Figures where sum of staff in post (as at 30 September 2004) and vacancies (as at 31 March 2005) is less than 10.
	Staff in post:
	7. Staff in post data is from the Non-Medical Workforce Census September 2004.
	General:
	8. Vacancy and staff in post numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number.
	9. Calculating the vacancy rates using the above data may not equal the actual vacancy rates.
	10. Due to rounding, totals may not equal the sum of component parts.
	Sources:
	Health and Social Care Information Centre Vacancies Survey March 2005
	Health and Social Care Information Centre Non-Medical Workforce Census September 2004

National Database

Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if she will assess the merits of establishing a national database of research into medical conditions for use by NHS consultants and university hospitals carrying out research; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: The Department funds the national research register which holds information on ongoing and recently completed research in the national health service. The register can be viewed online on the Department's website at www.dh.gov.uk/research. In addition, the map of medicine being developed by Connecting for Health will provide support on best practice in relation to specific clinical conditions. More details are available on their website at: www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/delivery
	In the longer term, proposals in the new national health research strategy Best Research for Best Health for the development of a unified knowledge management system will further meet the information needs of stakeholders including the NHS, research funding organisations, and universities.

Pathologists

Andrew Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the three-month vacancy rate is for pathologists at (a) Barnet and Chase Farm Hospital Trust, (b) Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, (c) Northwick Park Hospital and (d) London hospitals; and if she will make a statement.

Jane Kennedy: The information requested is not collected in the format requested. However, pathology group vacancy data by all London trusts and by acute trusts are shown in the table.
	
		The three month vacancy rate and number for Pathology Group Specialty Consultants by London Trust, as at 31 March 2005
		
			 Trust name Org Code 3 month vacancy rate (%) 3 month vacancy number Staff in post (full time equivalent) Staff in post (headcount) 
		
		
			 London total  3.4 16 453 521 
			 Barking and Dagenham PCT 5C2 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust RF4 0.0 0 18 18 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust RVL 0.0 0 11 11 
			 Barnet PCT 5A9 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health NHS Trust RRP (47) 0 0 0 
			 Barts and the London NHS Trust RNJ 0.0 0 34 41 
			 Bexley Care Trust TAK (47) 0 0 0 
			 Brent Teaching PCT 5K5 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust RG3 0.0 0 11 11 
			 Bromley PCT 5A7 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Camden and Islington Mental Health and Social Care Trust TAF (47) 0 0 0 
			 Camden PCT 5K7 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Central and North West London Mental Health NHS Trust RV3 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust RQM (46) 0 1 2 
			 City and Hackney PCT 5C3 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Croydon PCT 5K9 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust RC3 (46) 0 7 8 
			 Ealing PCT 5HX (47) 0 0 0 
			 East London and the City Mental Health NHS Trust RWK (47) 0 0 0 
			 Enfield PCT 5C1 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust RVR 0.0 0 22 23 
			 Great Ormond Street Hospital For Sick Children NHS Trust RP4 0.0 0 19 21 
			 Greenwich Teaching PCT 5A8 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Guys and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust RJ1 0.0 0 28 36 
			 Hammersmith and Fulham PCT 5H1 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust RQN 5.8 2 32 45 
			 Haringey Teaching PCT 5C9 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Harrow PCT 5K6 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Havering PCT 5A4 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Hillingdon Hospital NHS Trust RAS (46) 0 55  
			 Hillingdon PCT SAT (47) 0 0 0 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RQX (46) 1 3 4 
			 Hounslow PCT 5HY (47) 0 0 0 
			 Islington PCT 5K8 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Kensington and Chelsea PCT 5LA (47) 0 0 0 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Trust RJZ 4.4 2 33 38 
			 Kingston Hospital NHS Trust RAX 0.0 0 13 13 
			 Kingston PCT 5A5 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Lambeth PCT 5LD (47) 0 0 0 
			 Lewisham PCT 5LF (47) 0 0 0 
			 London Ambulance service RRU (47) 0 0 0 
			 Mayday HealthCare NHS Trust RJ6 (46) 1 8 10 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RP6 (46) 0 0 1 
			 Newham PCT 5C5 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Newham University Hospital NHS Trust RNH (46) 1 3 3 
			 North Central London SHA Q05 (47) 0 0 0 
			 North East London Mental Health NHS Trust RAT (47) 0 0 0 
			 North East London SHA Q06 0.0 0 0  
			 North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust RAP (46) 0 9 10 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust RV8 11.2 2 16 18 
			 North West London SHA Q04 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Oxleas NHS Trust RPG (47) 0 0 0 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust RG2 (46) 0 8 8 
			 Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust RGZ (46) 2 6 7 
			 Redbridge PCT 5NA (47) 0 0 0 
			 Richmond and Twickenham PCT 5M6 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust RT3 (46) 0 7 7 
			 Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust RAL 4.4 1 22 29 
			 Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RPY 0.0 0 14 15 
			 Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital NHS Trust RAN (46) 1 0 0 
			 South East London SHA Q07 (46) 0 1 1 
			 South London and Maudsley NHS Trust RV5 (46) 0 2 2 
			 South West London and St. George's Mental Health NHS Trust RQY (47) 0 0 0 
			 South West London SHA Q08 (46) 0 1 1 
			 Southwark PCT 5LE (47) 0 0 0 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust RJ7 0.0 0 22 26 
			 St. Mary's NHS Trust PJ5 0.0 0 17 21 
			 Sutton and Merton PCT 5M7 (47) 0 0 0 
			 Tavistock and Portman NHS Trust RNK (47) 0 0 0 
			 The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust RJ2 (46) 1 6 7 
			 The Whittington Hospital NHS Trust RKE 0.0 0 10 11 
			 Tower Hamlets PCT 5C4 (47) 0 0 0 
			 University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust RRV 0.0 0 48 52 
			 Waltham Forest PCT 5NC (47) 0 0 0 
			 Wandsworth PCT 5LG (47) 0 0 0 
			 West London Mental Health NHS Trust RKL (47) 0 0 0 
			 West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust RFW (46) 1 9 9 
			 Westminster PCT 5LC (46) 0 1 1 
			 Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust RGC (46) 2 6 6 
		
	
	(46) where the sum of the staff in post (fte) and number of vacancies is less then 10
	(47) where the sum of the staff in post (fte) and number of vacancies is 0
	Notes:
	1. Three month vacancies are vacancies which trusts are actively trying to fill, which had lasted for three months or more (full time equivalents (fte)).
	2. Three month Vacancy Rates are three month vacancies expressed as a percentage of three month vacancies plus staff in post (fte).
	3. Vacancy and staff in post numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number.
	4. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place.
	Source:
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre medical and dental workforce census
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre medical and dental vacancy survey
	
		The three month vacancy rate and number for pathology group specialty consultants by London Acute Trust, as at 31 March 2005
		
			 Trust name Org Code 3 month vacancy rate (%) 3 month vacancy number Staff in post (full-time equivalent) Staff in post (headcount) 
		
		
			 London Acute Trust total  3.4 15 424 490 
			 Barking, Havering and Redbridge Hospitals NHS Trust RF4 0.0 0 18 18 
			 Barnet and Chase Farm Hospitals NHS Trust RVL 0.0 0 11 11 
			 Barts and the London NHS Trust RNJ 0.0 0 34 41 
			 Bromley Hospitals NHS Trust RG3 0.0 0 11 11 
			 Chelsea and Westminster Healthcare NHS Trust RQM (48) 0 1 2 
			 Ealing Hospital NHS Trust RC3 (48) 0 7 8 
			 Epsom and St. Helier University Hospitals NHS Trust RVR 0.0 0 22 23 
			 Guys and St. Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust RJ1 0.0 0 28 36 
			 Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust RQN 5.8 2 32 45 
			 Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RQX (48) 1 3 4 
			 King's College Hospital NHS Trust RJZ 4.4 2 33 38 
			 Kingston Hospital NHS Trust RAX 0.0 0 13 13 
			 Mayday HealthCare NHS Trust RJ6 (48) 1 8 10 
			 Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RP6 (48) 0 0 1 
			 Newham University Hospital NHS Trust RNH (48) 1 3 3 
			 North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust RAP (48) 0 9 10 
			 North West London Hospitals NHS Trust RV8 11.2 2 16 18 
			 Queen Elizabeth Hospital NHS Trust RG2 (48) 0 8 8 
			 Queen Mary's Sidcup NHS Trust RGZ (48) 2 6 7 
			 Royal Brompton and Harefield NHS Trust RT3 (48) 0 7 7 
			 Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust RAL 4.4 1 22 29 
			 Royal Marsden Hospital NHS Foundation Trust RPY 0.0 0 14 15 
			 St. George's Healthcare NHS Trust RJ7 0.0 0 22 26 
			 St Mary's NHS Trust RJ5 0.0 0 17 21 
			 The Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust RJ2 (48) 1 6 7 
			 The Whittington Hospital NHS Trust RKE 0.0 0 10 11 
			 University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust RRV 0.0 0 48 52 
			 West Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust RFW (48) 1 9 9 
			 Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust RGC (48) 2 6 6 
		
	
	(48) where the sum of the staff in post (fte) and number of vacancies is less then 10
	Notes:
	1. Three month vacancies are vacancies which trusts are actively trying to fill, which had lasted for three months or more (full time equivalents (fte)).
	2. Three month vacancy rates are three month vacancies expressed as a percentage of three month vacancies plus staff in post (fte).
	3. Vacancy and staff in post numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number.
	4. Percentages are rounded to one decimal place.
	Source:
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre medical and dental workforce census
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre medical and dental vacancy survey

Sexual Health

John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps her Department is taking to improve sexual health among young people.

Caroline Flint: The inclusion of sexual health in the six national health service key priorities for 200607 is a further demonstration that sexual health is regarded as important and mainstream. The national strategy for sexual health and HIV (2001) sets out our long term plan to improve sexual health and modernise services, and identified young people as being one of the groups most vulnerable to poor sexual health. A new sexual health campaign focusing on younger men and women was announced in the White Paper Choosing Health and this builds on previous commitments to public health information aspects of this strategy.
	This also links closely to the cross-Government teenage pregnancy strategy, which is currently running radio, targeted magazine, satellite TV and cinema adverts aimed at 15 to 17-year-olds as part of its Want Respect, Use A Condom campaign. Furthermore, the R U Thinking campaign is targeting 13 to 15-year-olds with messages encouraging delaying early sex in teenage magazine titles and online.
	Sex and relationship education (SRE) is a key part of the personal, social and health education which is taught in all schools. This is reinforced by the healthy schools programme, which sets criteria for schools to achieve healthy school status. This includes a requirement that schools have an up to date SRE policy and implement this throughout their curriculum and pastoral provision, make good use of school nurses and sexual health outreach workers and have effective referral arrangements to specialist services. To date, over 75 per cent. of schools are participating in the programme.
	Added to this is the accelerated roll-out of the national Chlamydia screening programme which targets the sexually active under-25s, currently expected to reach 80 per cent. coverage of primary care trusts in England by April 2006. We are also piloting Chlamydia screening through Boots pharmacies in London and making improvements to contraception services.
	In addition to this national work, PCTs are responsible for providing sexual health services and health promotion which meet the needs of their local populations. To support them in this role, the Department has published good practice guidance and recommended standards, which include specific guidance in respect of services for young people. All of these documents are available on the Department's website at www.dh.gov.uk

Smoking

Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what representations her Department has received on elastic cigarettes developed by British American Tobacco; and what assessment she has made of their health effects.

Caroline Flint: Elastic cigarettes is a term explained in The Lancet March 4 2006 paper, Secret science: tobacco industry research on smoking behaviour and cigarette toxicity by Hammond D et al. In this paper, the authors report that
	BAT developed elastic cigarettes that produced low yields under standard testing procedure, whereas in consumers' hands they elicited more intensive smoking and provided higher concentrations of tar and nicotine to smokers.
	In the paper, the term smoke elasticity is reference to a 1983 British American Tobacco (BAT) research conference in Brazil.
	The Department is not aware of specific representations about BAT elastic cigarettes and no specific assessment therefore made. General awareness among the scientific community about misleading terms on cigarettes packs resulted in the introduction of EU Directive 2001/37/EC which lead to the banning of terms such as low tar, light, ultra-light and mild from cigarette packs sold in the United Kingdom from October 2003 and other tobacco products from October 2004.

Smoking

Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many people she estimates have (a) started and (b) stopped smoking in each quarter of each of the last five years.

Caroline Flint: The information is not available in the form requested.
	We are only able to provide data on the number of people who set a quit date through the NHS Stop Smoking Services and of those, how many had successfully quit (based on self report), in England.
	The following table provides quarterly and annual data on the monitoring of the NHS Stop Smoking Services, for the period April 2000 to September 2005.
	
		People(50) setting a quit date and those successfully quit(51), April 2000 to September 2005, England
		
			  Quarter Number setting a quit date Successful quitters 
		
		
			 April to March 2000 1 12,432 4,242 
			  2 20,694 9,229 
			  3 30,946 15,411 
			  4 68,472 35,672 
			 2000 total  132,544 64,554 
			 
			 April to March 2001 1 56,935 28,828 
			  2 48,578 25,054 
			  3 48,155 25,518 
			  4 73,667 40,434 
			 2001 total  227,335 119,834 
			 
			 April to March 2002 1 59,810 30,752 
			  2 49,049 24,976 
			  3 48,511 25,382 
			  4 77,488 42,972 
			 2002 total  234,858 124,082 
			 April to March 2003 1 68,620 36,573 
			  2 67,075 35,968 
			  3 76,400 43,615 
			  4 149,129 88,720 
			 2003 total  361,224 204,876 
			 
			 April to March 2004 1 104,420 56,192 
			  2 103,969 56,058 
			  3 109,781 62,121 
			  4 211,397 123,753 
			 2004 total  529,567 298,124 
			 
			 April to September 2005 1 142,717 74,719 
			  2 121,791 63,175 
			 2005 total  264,508 137,894 
		
	
	(50) Aged 16 and over.
	(51) A client is counted as having successfully quit smoking at the four week follow-up if he/she has not smoked at all since two weeks after the quit date. The figures presented here are based on self-report of smoking status by the client at the four week follow-up.
	Notes:
	1. 200506 Quarter one and two figures are provisional.
	2. Current data and information on NHS Stop Smoking Services is available at: http://www.ic.nhs.uk/pubsICpubfolder_view
	3. Historic data and information on NHS Stop Smoking Services can be found at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/PublicationsAndStatistics/Statistics/StatisticalWorkAreas/StatisticalPublicHealth/Statistical
	PublicHealthArticle/fs/en?CONTENT_ID=4032542chk=
	GhPZ%2By
	Source:
	NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre, Lifestyles Statistics

Sterile Services

Mark Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for Health when she expects to publish findings from the Pathfinder for Sterile Services.

Jane Kennedy: I refer the hon. Member to the reply to him on 9 November 2005, Official Report, column 637W.